Thursday, 8 January 2015

Danish Cartoon depicts Muslim faith for what it is(NOW with added blasphemy!)

I have published one of the cartoons that the 12 brave men and women who got shot to death today by 3 crazy Muslim bastards have published in the past.

We must not let them silence us.

Keep poking fun at all religions and all things that amuse you.

It is your right to do so.

I have so far resisted publishing these hilarious cartoons but have now entered the fray and expect a bit of a backlash.

These cartoons rightly parody the Muslim religion. They depict the prophet Mohamed and the Muslim religion for what it is: violent, nasty, dictatorial, murderous, cruel and unworkable in the modern world.

The mere fact that the Muslim world raises itself up with death treats and carries out murders and bombings against those who dare to criticise the religion, show the "faith" for what it really is.

"Moderate Muslims", if they truly exist, should counter all these death threats and extreme views against people's democratic right to free speech by publicly defending rights to free speech instead of joining the Muslim bandwagon and proclaiming some new jihad against the Western world.

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc38/dr2sky/danish_muslim_cartoons.gif
These cartoons are moderate in their message compared to the message of Jihad
pushed daily by Muslim leaders.




I wait with baited breath but don't expect condemnation of this extremism by the Muslim world.


Related Political Animal reading

Fully aware of Muslims: Jihad and Understanding
Having a multiple Muslim

Dutch Politicians Movie -Fitna (Full version)
Reaction to Muslim cartoons defended by some




c Political Animal 2008, 2015

34 comments:

  1. Wow that was a racist, misinformed, and inappropriate rant. Are there Muslim extremists, yes, are they crazy, yes, do they represent a large portion of the Muslim community, absolutely not. Your statements about the religion being violent etc shows just how little you know about it. Besides every religion, like every community has bad apples, just in a christian community the attacker was a "church going faithful christian" while a Muslim who does the same crime is condemned for his beliefs and the crime. Bottom line to sum up the most wide spread religion in the world as "violent, nasty, dictatorial, murderous, cruel" is completely ridiculous, unfair, and untrue. Your embarrassingly stupid article annoyed me, and I'm not even Muslim.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah I agree with the previous poster in that you made an awful lot of generalizations about Muslims. And extremists exist in any religion you can name.

    It's just best to let them cut their own throats, dude. Every time someone makes a cartoon depicting Muslims as violent and irrational just let them take the the streets and burn something in protest, or set off another car-bomb . . . and prove us all wrong. Enough said.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks for the comments you 2 secret contributors.

    Of course I should be free to say what I want and when I want without having my head cut off or the threat of having it cut off.

    That is my point in this article.

    If you have a point of view that is different from other Muslims who are more strict in their beliefs then why should your life or children's lives be threatened for doing so.

    Drawing a Cartoon should be punished by murder?

    A religion that teaches those things, be it Muslim or any other is quite simply nuts.

    I must reiterate. The Muslim religion(to whatever devoutness) is incompatible with the Western way of life and they simply cant exist peacefully in such a society without conflicting with the trash that they are brainwashed with written in their Koran.

    Thanks again.

    ReplyDelete
  5. your lives and your children?
    How do you think we feel?
    We worry waking up everyday wondering if the tank that just left will turn around and come back!

    What you've said is true in some ways extreamisim is bad but not all of us are them.
    There's Sunni's and Shia's who both bleieve in different versions of 'islam'
    Sunni's follow the quaran and what the mohammed said and shia is just... i cannot explain since it is so bad.

    But everyday we fear for our lives

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Aisha,

    thanks for your comment.

    What can I say, I have some sympathy with you and the conditions that you might live in, if I assume correctly where you might be writing from.

    You sound quite intelligent, willing and open to reason.

    Let me ask you a question and I just want to be as direct as I can.

    Why do you follow a religion that allows all these, as you say, "bad" things to happen to its followers and those that are non believers?

    Cheers, Darren

    ReplyDelete
  7. Darren you are a dumbass. The Muslim religion doesn't condone murdering, but it does justify defense. The problem comes from the way that the extremists interpret the holy words. I know you would love to think that the Western World's religion is so much better, but there was a time in history called "the Crusades" in which non-Christian's were persecuted and killed. How about the colonialization of Africa and the killing and murdering that occured there. These were in the name of religion. You are very ignorant. It is people like you who give America the image of stupid and igorant. Read a fucking book.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Brett, I am not religious at all. I prefer to think for myself.

    All religions are equally nuts.

    The Muslim religion DOES condone murder, in fact mass murder. It depends on how one interprets "defence" to arrive at the body count.

    I see reading books hasn't helped to broaden your outlook.

    I am a New Zealander and a huge fan of America.

    Thanks for your comments.

    ReplyDelete
  9. well your talking about freedome of spech oh!!!!!!!!!!!! lisetn to these words from a muslim /this calls for jhade no konwn disrespecs our profet licke that /now we will show you the real muslim allahwackbar

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous, you have proven my point

    ReplyDelete
  11. violent !!!!!! and what about what happening in palastine the land that have been robbed from its citizen by israel . israel who killed children every day by thousands

    ReplyDelete
  12. Israel has to defend itself from attack by Palestinian children with bombs strapped to them and nut cases who bomb Israelis buses and weddings.

    Thanks for your comment though Ali

    ReplyDelete
  13. hahah palestinian children attack israelian by rocks that really will cause very massive damage so israelian should defend them selfs by guns and tanks plus the land is for palestinian and israelian have nothing there wow u now show me that u just against all muslims and muslims just annoy u and trust me every time some one show up and attack muslims thousands of peoples turn to islam religion

    ReplyDelete
  14. DID AYESHA MARRY MUHAMMAD (P.B.U.H), THE PROPHET OF ISLAM, AT THE AGE OF 6?
    The Quran has not given names and other details of Prophet's wives but it has confirmed that all marriages of the Prophet (pbuh) were lawful (33:50). The age of Hadrat Ayisha(r), wife of the prophet, is disputed on the basis of a calligraphic error in history books. Narrated history, however sacred, is not above scrutiny, particularly where dignity and honour of the prophet is at stake. The following article is an attempt to dig out reality from the same history.
    Rev. Jerry Vines while speaking to the Pastors’ Conference of the Southern Baptist Convention, St. Louis, Missouri on June 10, 2002, called the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad (pbuh) a pedophile and demon-possessed. The Muslims all over the world were deeply offended by his remarks, as were many people of other faiths. While certainly both of these allegations about the person of the Prophet of Islam can be effectively rebutted, the author of this article proposes to present the Qur’anic concept of marriageable age as well as an in-depth analysis of the issue of Ayesha’s age at the time of her marriage with the Messenger of Allah (pbuh). This critique is based on many historical reports as documented in the history books of Islam.
    First, I would like to point out that according to the faith of Islam the vast majority of the Muslims professes, there are two sources of the Divine Guidance--the Qur’an and the Sunnah. The Quran is the actual Word of Allah (God) revealed by the archangel Gabriel to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) over a period of 23 years during the period 610-632 A.D in the Arabian Peninsula. The Qur’an that was revealed as Guidance and Light (17:9) for all mankind was written and properly documented by some forty scirbes during the lifetime of the Prophet. There is historical as well as the Qur’anic internal evidence to that effect (80:11-16 and 25:5) as well as God’s personal guarantee against any possible corruption in the Scripture (15:9). Additionally, the Qur’an was not only written and documented but it was committed to memory in its entirety during the lifetime of the Prophet (pbuh). This noble tradition of memorization of the Qur’an continues to this day. One can find hundreds of thousands of individuals around the world who know the entire Qur’an by heart. It is noteworthy that although there are several sects in Islam, the Qur’an remains perfectly preserved to the letter in its original Arabic language and recited, understood and referred to for explanations by all sects the same way. Thus, while the interpretations may vary, the original Arabic text has remained the same without sectarian bias.
    The Qur’an enjoined Muhammad (and all believers) to strictly follow the Quran (6:106; 10:109; 33:2) and it stands witness to the fact that Muhammad and his followers did exactly that all their lives (7:203; 46:9; 6:50). In fact, Muhammad himself was warned in rather stern terms not to go against the Qur’anic teachings (17:39, 10:94-95, 69:40-48). Furthermore, the Qur’an declares Muhammad (pbuh) to be a man of highest moral standards (68:4; 33:21) and the best exemplar for humanity. The Qur’an enjoins the believers in scores of verses to follow Muhammad’s teachings and accept him as a final authority in all their affairs.
    The Second generally accepted source of Islamic faith is the Sunnah. The Sunnah is the summation of Islamic teachings related to faith and code of conduct as personally practiced and perpetuated by Muhammad (pbuh) for all believers to implement and follow in their personal lives as well as in proper Islamic governance. The Sunnah protocols related to articles of Islamic faith and rituals are continuous from the day of the Prophet but a great many others are largely derived from a huge body of compilations of oral narrations referred to as Hadith. The Hadith, commonly known as traditions of the Prophet, consists of many books of compilations of reported accounts of Muhammad’s sayings, actions, and tacit approvals. There are six books of Hadith (Sihah Sita) that are considered authentic by the main stream Sunni Muslims. There is also a different set of four Hadith books for the Shia Muslim community. All these books were written 200-300 years after the death of Muhammad (pbuh). The documentation of these books proceeded based on collection of hundreds of thousands of stories from the then living people who transmitted accounts or stories about Muhammad or his companions as they heard from earlier generations. Thus, the process of oral transmission (word of mouth) made the basis of all these collections. This process commonly known as ‘Isnaad’ or ‘chain of narration’ comprised a chain of 4-6 or more narrators in time going back to the companions of Muhammad and to Muhammad himself over a period of 250-300 or more years. These accounts seek to portray the Muslim culture and history during the lifetime of the Prophet of Islam. Nonetheless, it must be pointed out that the only true surviving book, call it Islamic history or Divine Guidance, that was memorized by thousands of Companions of the Prophet and written in a completely and carefully documented form is none other than the Qur’an itself. The first non-Qur’anic history book, ‘Seerat Rasoolallah’ (Seerah), by Ibn Ishaq (d. 767 A.D) was written more than 90 years after the death of Muhammad. That book of history was also based on oral transmissions. Ibn Ishaq was severely criticized by some notable scholars of Islam such as Malik bin Anas, the originator of the Maliki School of though in Islamic jurisprudence mainly practiced in Africa.
    The majority of Muslims considers two of the six Hadith books, those authored by Al-Bukhari (d. 870 A.D) and Al-Muslim (d. 875 A.D) most authentic after the Qur’an despite the fact that they were written 200-300 years after the advent of Islam. These scholars of Islam exercised great caution in selecting what they called correct traditions and proceeded with purest of intentions but one must not lose sight of the fact that they still collected ‘narrations’ from living people who were not primary or even secondary and tertiary sources of the accounts of the life and sayings of Muhammad (pbuh) and his companions. Some Islamic historians (and/or exegetes of the Qur’an) whose books about early Islamic history are considered of high importance and who derive their history of early Islam from Ibn Ishaq’s Seerah include Tabari (d. 923 ), Ibn Katheer, Ibn Hisham (d. 827 A.D) and Ibn Hajar Al-asqalani, to name a few.
    The introduction given above of the two sources of Islam (the Qur’an and the Sunnah/Hadith) is necessary for the reader to understand the issue at hand---the age of Ayesha, the third wife of Prophet Muhammad at the time of her marriage.
    How does the Qur’an define ‘marriageable age’?
    There are several Hadith reports that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) married his third wife Ayesha when she was 6 year old and consummated her marriage when she was 9. If this is true, then it must be consistent with the Qur’an that tells us that Muhammad himself followed the Qur’an before he asked others to follow it. The Qur’an does not assign a definite number to the age at which a man or a woman becomes ‘adult’ or ready to marry. However, there is a clear definition of the marriageable age as per 4:6:
    [an-Nisa' 4:6] Make trial of orphans until they reach the age of marriage; if then ye find sound judgment in them, release their property to them;
    This verse is taking about two concepts here: First of all, the trustee of a property should first test the ability of the grown up orphan to see if he or she is capable of managing his or her own affairs well. Second, the Qur’an provides guidelines for the trustee as to the time at which the property of the orphans is to be handed over--it is the time when the orphan has attained adulthood or marriageable age and that he or she has attained a good degree of mental maturity. Thus, the Qur’an gives a clear definition of adulthood or marriageable age as the one when one has attained a good measure of mental maturity. This should raise the question: Does a 6- or 9-year old have that level of quality of sound judgment? The answer is a resounding NO. If Muhammad married a 6 year old girl (and consummated her marriage at age 9), one wonders if he actually followed the Qur’anic guidelines regarding this issue. Please recall that the Qur’an states that Muhammad is a model for all mankind and that he himself followed the Qur’an in its entirety while ordering the same for his devout followers.
    The Qur’anic guidelines as described clearly in 4:6 tell us that Muhammad could not have married a young girl of age 6 or 9. There are other verses where the marriage bond has been described as “solemn covenant/solid contract---Meethaqan ghaleezan” (4:21). It is mighty revealing to me that in 4:21 for husband-wife relationship the same composition “meethaqan ghaleezan” has been used for the covenant that Allah took from all the prophets including our own prophet (33:7). Not only that, the same expression was also used when Allah took covenant from the Jews not to violate the Sabbath (4:154). Thus, according to the Qur'an 'tying the knot' is going for a "Meethaqan Ghaleezan" (a solemn covenant of mutual trust and faithfulness for each other). This a definition of marriage, which later, when developed and nourished, gives rise to love, tranquillity and mutual feelings of caring (30:21), as well as to our offspring as comfort of our eyes (25:74).
    These verses, as far as the author of this article is concerned, should suffice and bury the issue of the age of Ayesha’s marriage with the Prophet of Allah (pbuh) for good. Ayesha could not have been 6 years of age because:
    1. She could not have been an adult woman capable of making her own sound decisions, and,
    2. She could not have entered into a ‘solemn covenant’ at the age of 6 with a 55-year old man. This defies all reasons for a productive and meaningful union.
    3. The Prophet, according to the Qur’an, is a model for all humanity. The Qur’an tells us that he was at the highest of moral pedestal. Even if child marriages were common in his community, he could not have gone for it because it went against the Qur’anic injunctions of 4:6 and 4:21.
    Nonetheless, since the charge of paedophilia by Rev. Vines rested solely on some Hadith reports and not on any of the Qur’anic verses, the attention is now turned to those Hadith accounts and many other observations related to Ayesha’s age, and their in-depth analysis.
    Was Ayesha really 6 years old when she married Muhammad?
    A few comments about Muhammad’s marriages are in order. Muhammad married his first wife, Khadijah, several years before his announcement as a prophet of Islam. Khadijah was a reasonably well-to-do woman of Makkah and was 15 years his senior. Muhammad was 25 and Khadijah was 40 at the time of their marriage. This loving and caring monogamous relationship continued for 25 years until her death. Muhammad, now over 50 years of age, married a relatively aged woman by the name of Saudah. It is thus important to note here that Muhammad’s twenty five prime youth years were spent in purely monogamous relationship with a lady 15 years his senior. This speaks volumes about this man’s piety and loyalty in spousal matters as well as about the fact that his later marriages could not have been motivated by any human wild sexual desires. In 620-621 A.D, he and his devout companions migrated from Makkah to Medina. Then a couple of years later, he married Ayesha, a daughter of his closest companion, Abu Bakr, in the 3rd Hijrah (Islamic calendar--623-24 A.D). This information coming from diverse historical and Hadith sources is widely agreed upon and therefore can be, a priori, considered authentic. Based on this information, and a host of other related bits and pieces detailed below, it can be shown that Ayesha could have been at least 16-19 of age at the time of her marriage with Muhammad (pbuh). The following is the detail of the analysis of these historical and Hadith accounts.
    1. Several books of Hadith (Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim, Abu Dawood, among others) and Islamic history (Tabari, among others) report that Ayesha was married to the Prophet at 6 but her marriage was not consummated until she was 9. Although, this information is widely quoted and found in many Hadith and history books, it must be noted that most of this information has come from a single person, Hisham bin Urwah, who is the last narrator of this Hadith Isnaad (chain of narration) on the authority of his father. Thus, this Hadith is primarily a single Hadith. Some other narratives mention the same Hadith but their narration has been found weak and unacceptable. In general, a Hadith has more credibility if it is narrated by more people independently from diverse chains of narrators. In this case, there is basically only one source.
    2. Despite the abundance of information available during the 71 years that Hisham bin Urwah lived and taught in Medina, it is rather odd that that no one else—not even his famous pupil Malik ibn Anas---reported Ayesha’s age from Hisham in Medina. Furthermore, all the narrators of this Hadith were Iraqis. Hisham is reported to have moved to Iraq in his later years. An extensive list of biographical sketches of all narrators including these Iraqis is available in some books.
    3. Yaqub ibn Shaibah is reported to have said, “narratives reported by Hisham are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq". Malik ibn Anas (d. 795), a student of Hisham in fact discredited all narratives of Hisham that were reported through people of Iraq.
    (Tehzibu'l-tehzib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh), vol 11, pg 48 - 51).
    4. It is reported that Hisham bin Urwah’s memory suffered in his later years to the extent that some of the traditions reported from Hisham bin Urwah could not be trusted for authenticity.
    (Mizanu'l-ai`tidal, by Al-Zahbi , Arabic, a book on the life sketches of the narrators of the Hadith, Al-Maktabatu'l-athriyyah, Sheikhupura, Pakistan, Vol 4, pg 301).
    5. Even though Ayesha is reported to have been born about eight years before Hijrah (around 614 A.D.), one can find another narrative in Bukhari (kitabu'l-tafseer) whereby Ayesha is reported to have said that she was a ‘young girl’ at the time of revelation of the 54th chapter of the Qur'an which came 9 years before Hijrah (around 612 A.D). Thus, according to this tradition, Ayesha was a young girl (Jariyah—as she calls herself and not an infant in which case she would be sibyah). Additionally, this narrative stands in direct contrast to the one reported on Ayesha’s age by Hisham bin Urwah. This puts Ayesha’s age significantly higher than 9 as reported by Hisham bin Urwah—possibly 15 or even higher. Obviously, if this narrative is held to be true, it is in clear
    contradiction with the narratives reported by Hisham
    ibn Urwah. There is no compelling reason as to why this tradition should be considered less accurate vis-à-vis Hisham’s narrative).

    (Sahih Bukhari, kitabu'l-tafsir, Arabic, Bab Qaulihi Bal al-sa`atu Maw`iduhum wa'l-sa`atu adha' wa amarr).
    6. According to many narratives, Ayesha participated in the battles of Badr and Uhud. No one older than 15 was allowed to accompany the Prophet’s army in the battle of Uhud. This applied across the board to all participants, men and women alike. The battle of Uhud took place around the 2nd Hijrah, a time line close to her marriage with the Prophet. Obviously, she was at least older than 15 at that time.
    A narrative regarding Ayesha's participation in the battle of `Uhud is given in Bukhari, (Kitabu'l-jihad wa'l-siyar, Arabic, Bab Ghazwi'l-nisa' wa qitalihinna ma`a'lrijal; that all boys under 15 were sent back is given in Bukhari, Kitabu'l-maghazi, Bab ghazwati'l-khandaq wa hiya'l-ahza'b, Arabic).
    8. Most historians have consensus on the age of one of the oldest female companions of the Prophet, namely, Asma, the elder sister of Ayesha that was ten years older than Ayesha. It is also reported in Taqri'bu'l-tehzi'b as well as Al-bidayah wa'l-nihayah that Asma died in 73 Hijrah when she was 100 years old. Clearly, if Asma was 27 or 28 years old at the time of Hijrah, Ayesha was 17 at the time of Hijrah and 19 at the time of consummation of her marriage with Muhammad.

    (For Asma being 10 years older than Ayesha, see A`la'ma'l-nubala', Al-Zahabi, Vol 2, Pg 289, Arabic, Mu'assasatu'l-risalah, Beirut, 1992. Ibn Kathir confirms this fact, [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by ten years" (Al-Bidayah wa'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol 8, Pg 371, Arabic, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933). For Asma being 100 years old, see Al-Bidayah wa'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol 8, Pg 372, Arabic, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933). Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani also has the same information: "She [Asma (ra)] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH." Taqribu'l-tehzib, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, Pg 654, Arabic, Bab fi'l-nisa', al-harfu'l-alif, Lucknow).
    9. Tabari informs in his treatise on Islamic history that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the pre Islamic period. The pre-Islamic period ended in 610 A.D, a fact that makes Ayesha to be at least 14 years of age at the time of her marriage around 613-624 A.D.
    Tarikhu'l-umam wa'l-mamlu'k, Al-Tabari, Vol 4, Pg 50, Arabic, Dara'l-fikr, Beirut, 1979).
    10. Ibn Hisham, the historian, reports that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before `Umar ibn al-Khattab which only means that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam close to the time of first revelation (around 610 A.D). This means she must have been at least a young girl at that time. Assuming she was barely 6 or 7 at that time this information puts the age of Ayesha at 20 or more at the time of her marriage with Muhammad (623-624 A.D.), (Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, Ibn Hisham, vol 1, Pg 227 – 234 and 295, Arabic, Maktabah al-Riyadh al-hadithah, Al-Riyadh).
    11. Tabari reports that before migrating to Habashah, Abu Bakr planned to hand over his daughter, Ayesha to Mut’am’s son to whom she was engaged. But fearing persecution by the Quraish, Mut’am refused and his son divorced Ayesha. The migration to Habashah happened 8 years before Hijra. Obviously, at the time she was ready to take on responsibilities as a wife (possibly 9 or 10 years of age). If she married Muhammad in the 2nd Hijrah (623-624 A.D), she could not be less than 19 years of age (a secondary reference for this argument is: Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat, Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi, Urdu, Pg 38, Anjuman Uswa e hasanah, Karachi, Pakistan).
    12. A famous Sunni imam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, reports in His Musnad, that after the death of Khadijah, Khaulah came to the Prophet (pbuh) and advised him to marry again. She had two propositions for the Prophet: Either Muhammad could marry a virgin (bikr), or he could go for woman who had already been married (thayyib)". Khaulah named Ayesha for a virgin (bikr). It is common knowledge that the term bikr in the Arabic language refers to a well formed lady and not to a 9 year old, playful, immature lass. If she were nine, the word used by Khaulah would have been jariyah and not bikr.
    (Musnad, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Vol 6, Pg 210, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-`arabi, Beirut).
    Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani has reported that Fatimah, Muhammad’s daughter, was five years older than Ayesha and that Fatimah was born when the Prophet was 35 years old. Thus, Ayesha, according to Ibn Hajar, was born when Muhammad was 40 and consummated her marriage when he was 54 or 55. That makes Aysha at least 15-16 years of age.
    (Al-isabah fi tamyizi'l-sahabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Vol 4, Pg 377, Arabic, Maktabatu'l-Riyadh al-haditha, al-Riyadh,1978)
    Finally, it must be pointed out that Ayesha’s age at the time of her marriage has never been an issue. If it were, his enemies must have picked up on this issue as they did to him on some other issues. Also, the reader must note that none of these Hadith reports concerning Ayesha’s controversial age of marriage with the Prophet goes back to the Prophet himself. In other words, it is not the Prophet himself who said Ayesha was 6 or 9. These reports came from a single individual and the Iraqis reported from him when he grew old and his memory started failing.
    In conclusion, this article is an attempt to prove that the books written 200-300 years after the death of Muhammad, while providing a good deal of historical information about him are not free from faulty, less than perfect and self-contradictory materials. These should not be taken as the final word for a Muslim. There is a Final Word for a Muslim and that is the Book of God, the Holy Qur’an—the book that defines the marriageable age for a man or woman when he or she attains soundness of judgment (Al-Qur’an 4:6). If Muhammad is a model for mankind, if he followed the Qur’an all his life, if Allah stands witness to his rock-solid character, there is no way that he could have taken a 6-9 year old, immature young, playful girl as a responsible wife.

    i_m_urs@hotmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  15. Darren Richard,
    who ever you are, sitting in front of your little computer screen somewhere with hundreds of sheep in your backyard, you do not have the right to pass judgement on an entire religion based on your own narrow minded assumptions and false stereotypes which have been fed down your throat by the media. Islam is a religion of peace and unity. It is not in anyway violent, nasty dictatorial, murderous or any of the other vicious comments you laid upon it. I am not Muslim myself but i think it is my responsibility to clear up what people like you, with your limited perceptions of a religion that holds over 1.8 billion followers worldwide, say. Around every fifth person on this planet of ours is a Muslim, and if you are to suggest to me that every single one of them is a crazy evil religious fanatic that is wagging some 'holy war' against the evil west, i must tell you, you are horribly mistaken. Islam never tolerates unprovoked aggression and the Quran expresses a compassion for the innocent. The Quran states: "Let there be no compulsion in religion" (2:256)
    It is merely the actions of a small minority who have a false interpretation of the religion which you are choosing to base your judgements on. You are misguided from the truth and ignorant of your own limited views.
    Please wake up to yourself. You are an idiot and it's people like you that cause all the horrific problems in our world. I know this is just an insignificant comment on some blog, but please understand that this is not a small matter. This is a global issue. My advice: do some reading mate, maybe find out just a little bit about a topic before you just go off ranting your head off about nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  16. You are doing some generalisations yourself Anon.

    "Islam never tolerates unprovoked aggression" you say, that is really what I am talking about. Muslim extremists use that as an excuse to kill innocent people, including their own.

    All religions are dopey, with dopey beliefs, and the Muslim religion is violent, nasty and venal. I know this because all I have to do is read for myself some of the atrocities committed in the name of the Muslim god.

    I am entitled to my opinion as you are to yours. The Muslim religion would not tolerate my view because they do not respect others views. I do.

    Thanks for your comment.

    ReplyDelete
  17. wow darren i love you finaaly someone who sees religion espacially islam the same way i do. i mean has anyone else noticed that muslims are causing trouble and bombings all around the world. also how often does jesus get made fun of or parodied. way more than Mohameed yet have you ever hear of Christians tring to murder the creators of those peices. i my opinion the whole world should start publishing anti muslim material and let them hate everyone even more. and to all you defending islam open your fucking eyes you stupid bastards and see what is really happening to our world.

    ReplyDelete
  18. We live in a world where ignorance seems to be the winner in most arguments.

    I must say Aaron, I think all religions are dopey but the Muslim religion is another story entirely.

    Having violence,retribution and murder of all those that don't agree with you as a central part of your mantra means that this religion has no place in this or any other world.

    Cheers.

    ReplyDelete
  19. How can you say that just because one muslim does something wrong, they're all wrong. That is completely racist and wrong. Whoever made this should be ashamed and perhaps do some research about the Muslim religion, becuase obviously they know nothing about it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I understand you have an opinion and you are entitled to it and I am not going to murder you because of that.

    I think you are dead wrong and when you look at this hateful,violent, murderous religion, you would have question your sanity for believing in it.

    Scratch even a "moderate" Muslim and he will tell you it is right to defend his religion against those that critique it.

    The evidence is out there to back my point of view up. NOT yours.

    Thanks for your comment though.

    Racist? Nah, I just like freedom to say what I want to say without having my head chopped off.

    ReplyDelete
  21. um..non-muslim people also commit crimes..why dont u go against them..is it cuz ur a non-muslim huh?

    ReplyDelete
  22. The piece you are commenting on is about Muslims and their violent murderous religion NOT about other individuals or groups commit crimes.

    ReplyDelete
  23. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg

    Can't say it any better than this....ifthe link doesn't work just type "Richard Dawkins wrong" into YouTube.

    Why do people do this to themselves....

    ReplyDelete
  24. i think the bomb in the turban cartoon is an absolute classic.....was it not posted with the line "Does my bomb look big in this" though?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Give us a brief rundown of what Dawkin's main argument is anon.

    ReplyDelete
  26. As muslims we are ordered to seek knowledge. It is compulsory upon those who are by the means to simply go out into the world and learn.

    The prophet Mohamed also said however: 'Adaab ul fou'qal ilm' which means 'respect comes before knowledge'

    Now there are many differences of oppinion on this quote but wen considered with other historic recordings its profound significance is quite clear.

    One day a group of jewish men were carrying the body of a deceased jewish man to a burial site. As they walked by the place wer the prophet mohamed was sitting with his companions, the prophet stood up and bowed his head. When asked by his companions why he did this he said that it was merely a sign of respect. The quran and the prophet clearly teaches respect and tollerance of all faiths, religions, and even differences of oppinion between people concerning even the most trivial of things. Sadly many of us have forgotten this.

    Islam is derived from the word salaam. Which in arabic means peace. How ironic it is that the stereotype of our faith has come to mean exactly the opposite. Because of a minority of uneducated, arrogent and ignorent muslims.

    Islam also teaches that we as humans are the favourite of gods creatures and as favorites have been blessed with the greatest of all gifts...free will. The ability to think and decide for ourselves.
    However this gift 'akl' or free will comes at a price. Our 'nafs'. Now its is hard for me to clearly illustrate in a few words exactly what 'nafs' are. It is an unfair and innacurate translation but the best english word that can describe it is 'desire' to say that it governs our moods or feelings is somewhat of an unfair description but closest to that which you would understand when loosely translated. Nafs is responsible for arrogence, ignorence, disrespect, etc. One can therefore say that an uneducated or excersized mind is constantly at the mercy of ones nafs. So things like racism, intollerance, disrespect are attributes of a lesser mind.

    Many muslims like any human being have allowed their anger to consume them. Therfore inhibiting their ability to make rational decisions. The quran simply refers to disbelievers as those who have gone astray. When the saudi's translated this into english they put...like the jews and critians in brackets. Idiots. How dare they. This is not the teaching of the quran nor our prophet. But I state this as a simple example of how we have allowed our faith to become the stereotype it is today.

    Now I assume you are an educated man darren. I'm sure you are well aware of the hundreds of great muslim minds who have contributed profoundly to the areas of science, math, astronomy and so forth. Lets not alow a few feeble minded extemists and their trail destruction to govern your oppinion of an entire faith. The rabbit holes goes so much deeper than that which you see and I am saddend that I cannot educate you further.

    I am a muslim illustrator, and I laugh at these offensive cartoons because they are funny. It doesnt make me angry, just sad because I know they are simply a reflection of misguided, uninformed oppions.

    I believe in freedom of speech. But not when it attacks someones charachter. I cannot and will not mock nor disrespect your beliefs what ever they may be. I humbly request you do the same.

    btw. I thort i'd share an irony about your blog. Despite your anti islamic oppinions you have an add promoting muslima.com to keep your site up. Now that...is funny.

    Keep well darren perhaps I'll see you in the afterlife:)

    ReplyDelete
  27. Hi Ashiq,

    thanks for your thoughts.

    It seems a well reasoned and cogent argument without personal abuse.

    I haven't got time to answer you fully as yet but I will at the end of the day because you deserve a well thought over response.

    The advertising is Google and I have little control over it, it mimics the subjects that are written about. :)

    Regards, Darren Rickard

    ReplyDelete
  28. Hi again Ashiq, nice of you to have a considered approach to this subject. As you can see from some of the comments they have been violent and personal attacks on my person.

    All I did was comment on those cartoons and the violence, death, destruction and censorship that followed their publication from the Muslim world at large.

    These kind of reactions to free speech cannot be tolerated by any of us and they must be condemned at every opportunity.

    You say at the end of your comment:

    I am a muslim illustrator, and I laugh at these offensive cartoons because they are funny. It doesnt make me angry, just sad because I know they are simply a reflection of misguided, uninformed oppions.

    I believe in freedom of speech. But not when it attacks someones charachter. I cannot and will not mock nor disrespect your beliefs what ever they may be. I humbly request you do the same.

    You say you believe in freedom of speech Ashiq but then say I cant criticize your beliefs. That my friend is not freedom of speech.

    I would be interested to hear your reply.

    Regards, Darren

    ReplyDelete
  29. Hello. I am a Turkish. but not a muslim.

    and, that first cartoon have a symbol like turkish flag

    this is turkish flag...

    http://turkbirdev.info/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/Turkish_flag2.360192241.png

    so, that cartoon artist may dont have enough knowledge about what he( or she ) drawing. because, that symbol not a symbol of muslims. but some people may think that is a symbol of muslims.

    its turkish flag. and turks are not murder...

    there is muslim turkish people,
    there is christian turkish people,
    there is atheist turkish people,
    there is deist turkish people,

    all that people living in Turkey. and turkey just developing. may not perfect a country to live. but we know that, Turkish people not terorist.

    so, you cant use that symbol with your anti-muslim idea... if you think " i cant! " so, i just say this, you is real murder. because u killin 70 million people with your wrong idea...

    if you dont see Turkey never, u cant use that symbol again.

    i dont see never japan, or russia, or england.. i can say " christian faith wrong! " but i cant use this sentence with england flag or france flag... because france or england not mean christianism...

    countries cant have religion. people may be..

    Turkey is a republic. Governement dont have a religion. you may think "iran muslim" but u cant think " Turkey is muslim. " because i am a Turkish. but i am not Muslim. and you making dirty my Country flag with your wrong ideas... so. i must say this again : being a turkish not about with dna codes. being a turkish, living in Turkey republic. if you move Turkey, you will be a turkish for me. if i move to germany, i will be a german for me... Turkish means this. not racism. not religious thing. it just mean " being a human living in Turkey land... "

    ReplyDelete
  30. You are right Kadir, Turkey IS a democracy and clearly shouldn't be lumped in with all the other mad-arse Murderous Muslim dictatorships.

    I would LOVE to travel there one day.

    See if you can work on the Turkish Mussies.

    ReplyDelete
  31. You should ask others about Muslims. Ask from USA, from jews who made war between palestinians. 60% of USA citizens are jews and they are the biggest enemy of Muslims. They always try to make us bad. We Muslims do not like war, crime and violance. We just want quite life. And how can you be sure that all this terroric acts was made by Muslims!

    ReplyDelete
  32. Muslim, The Jews and Muslims have been fighting for thousands of years and they probably always will but most recently it is Muslims that have been the perpetrators and instigators of most of the violence in the Middle East.

    Many Palestinians are brainwashed from birth to believe Jews are evil and should all be eradicated.

    It is time for the Muslim world to renounce their violent and barbaric ways in order to spread their Muslim tentacles.

    ReplyDelete
  33. maybeI came late but But I want to tell you something We are on the right and our religion of peace not only from the aggression Aj.s. and all the news you have of us is fabricated news, therefore it is not true if you want to talk about our religion, you have the right books to read .. And expressed amazement at the fact that there Aschas Your mentality is the same attacking without thinking logically

    ReplyDelete
  34. Anon, little of the violent backlash from Muslims reported over the publication of these cartoons was "made up" and neither is most reportage. You are in denial.

    ReplyDelete